On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:19 PM David Mason <dma...@ryerson.ca> wrote:
> I really don't understand the reticence to use setjmp/longjmp to turn all > of these short-cut exits into library return-to-API trampolines. It > To be clear: that's my reticence, not Richard's. libfossil was always effectively a third-party effort which had Richard's blessing. My aversion to setjmp/longjmp is that they're effectively global gotos, and gotos, except in very tightly-controlled circumstances, quickly produces spaghetti messes. would allow you to retain all the existing fossil codebase. Rewriting the > code into library form is an interesting project, but it seems like a huge > amount of work and unless Richard is going to change fossil to use the API, > it is also going to be a huge ongoing maintenance nightmare and fraught > with opportunities for failure. > Isn't adding hundreds (literally) of gotos just as fraught with opportunities for failure ;)? It's a few dozen lines of code (in addition to the actual API interface > code). Sure seems like worth the experiment to me! > i'll go make some popcorn :). (To be fair: my [strong] aversion to that solution isn't intended to imply that you can't pull it off. My journey with libfossil was always _at least_ as much about reimplementing it "cleanly" as it was about getting it running at all. Without the former, the latter would have been, at best, a hollow success.) -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
